Nathan Brown hit on Adam Saad

[Devington]

Straight to the tribunal

High Contact? I've looked a couple of times and can't really make it out. Am I just missing it?

 

[Doss]

Straight to the tribunal

I’m a bit surprised by this. Intentional? Yes probably. High impact? Yep. Don’t think it was high contact per se though, he got him somewhere around the collarbone I think.

If it’s going to the tribunal then he’s probably in for a decent stint on the sidelines.

I still don’t think it warrants more than a week.

 

[Plugger35]

Straight to the tribunal

Not sure why it needed to be referred to the tribunal, that probably means he will get a ridiculously over the top suspension now.

No doubt all the pissing and moaning about it from the Ch7 commentators played a part in that decision.

 

[didaksrightfoot]

Straight to the tribunal

Yeah thats bullshit.
I dont know how you can call it high contact, and if it is true that MC has previously called all bumps "careless" then it cannot be intentional. Its just caving to media pressure.

 

[didaksrightfoot]

High Contact? I've looked a couple of times and can't really make it out. Am I just missing it?

Nope - i think you are viewing it perfectly.

The hit was to Saads shoulder. Saad then had some serious whiplash, and it was probably that suddent head movement that caused the problem. He might have hit Browns shoulder as his head jolted but I have not seen that clearly on any of the clips. To suggest that Brown hit him high is incorrect from what I have seen so far, and to suggest that it was that contact that caused the problem (rather than the whiplash from Saads lack of vision of a bump coming from infront of him) is dubious at best.

Problem is, with the current sensationalist AFL media, Brown and St Kilda will be facing a hiding to nothing if they try to argue this at the tribunal.

 

[Unfazed]

Looks like shoulder clipped his chin. Is chin high?

 

[Chaisa]

Did not expect that to be intentional (because bumps rarely are) or head contact (because it didn't look like it to me). Seems a witch-hunt.

 

[Doss]

I think the key thing for me is again, like the Francis one last week and why that one annoyed me no end, is the direction the head snaps after impact.

Saad’s head wouldn’t go that way if he’d been hit on the chin.

Necks aren’t made of linguini.

 

[didaksrightfoot]

Looks like shoulder clipped his chin. Is chin high?

Do you have a pic of that?

 

[DonsRule]

I’m a bit surprised by this. Intentional? Yes probably. High impact? Yep. Don’t think it was high contact per se though, he got him somewhere around the collarbone I think.

If it’s going to the tribunal then he’s probably in for a decent stint on the sidelines.

I still don’t think it warrants more than a week.

Not sure why it needed to be referred to the tribunal, that probably means he will get a ridiculously over the top suspension now.

No doubt all the pissing and moaning about it from the Ch7 commentators played a part in that decision.

I thought it was a 1 maybe 2 week suspension.

I didn't think it was high as much as it was a cheap shot at someone not looking. Like the JoM Francis incident last week, whiplash from the impact.


The same bump if he saw it coming or say it was a sheppard, I don't even thing it deserves a fine. The lateness was what make it deserve 1-2 weeks to me.

 

[DonsRule]

Yeah thats bullshit.
I dont know how you can call it high contact, and if it is true that MC has previously called all bumps "careless" then it cannot be intentional. Its just caving to media pressure.

I think it was intentional. But I didn't call it high was to the body to me - maybe you could argue it was medium impact too, which is 1-2 weeks.

 

[didaksrightfoot]

I think the key thing for me is again the direction the head snaps after impact.

From what I've seen so far that looks more like the whiplash from the hit giving the opposing players momentums, rather than his head hitting the shoulder.
If someone has the pic of their being clear head contact with any kind of force, then fair enough - i havent seen it yet.

 

[maskmcgee]

MC has previously called all bumps "careless" then it cannot be intentional.

Show me one other bump this year that happened 2 seconds after the player had got rid of the ball.

 

[didaksrightfoot]

I think it was intentional. But I didn't call it high was to the body to me - maybe you could argue it was medium impact too, which is 1-2 weeks.

I would say high impact, but careless rather than intentional. Other than being late it was the perfect bump. He came from in front of him, did not leave the ground, and clearly went shoulder to shoulder. Againt he was late, and should get a week given the injury, but that was a good strong bump and most coaches would want to see that from their players.

 

[Tex9798]

Throw a punch because you are angry at your opponent = misconduct

Bump a player fractionally late and it's intentional?

Hmm I think he made a blue here.

 

[Doss]

From what I've seen so far that looks more like the whiplash from the hit giving the opposing players momentums, rather than his head hitting the shoulder.
If someone has the pic of their being clear head contact with any kind of force, then fair enough - i havent seen it yet.

Agreed. For the top of the head to slew towards the direction of the bump, the point of impact must surely be below the head. If the impact is on the head itself, the top of the head surely slews away from the direction of impact.

 

[Chief]

Yeah thats bullshit.
I dont know how you can call it high contact, and if it is true that MC has previously called all bumps "careless" then it cannot be intentional. Its just caving to media pressure.

It can take a second to wrap your head around, but the intentional is in relation to the actual bump.

He intended to collide with the other player.

The "intended" may not mean he intended to cause harm.

So, once we know he intended to bump the player, was it done with skill and care not to cause harm? Could he have avoided that harm?

Once you understand that then it makes more sense.

 

[Plugger35]

It can take a second to wrap your head around, but the intentional is in relation to the actual bump.

He intended to collide with the other player.

The "intended" may not mean he intended to cause harm.

So, once we know he intended to bump the player, was it done with skill and care not to cause harm? Could he have avoided that harm?

Once you understand that then it makes more sense.

Since when has a bump been executed without wanting to cause some sort of harm? That's the one of the main reasons to lay a bump I would've thought.

Ideally you want to be causing harm by hitting the opposition players body though and not the head as that will get you suspended.

From what I've seen the initial contact from Brown was to Saad's shoulder, it was the whiplash motion that probably caused the concussion.

 

[Dave]

I think the key thing for me is again, like the Francis one last week and why that one annoyed me no end, is the direction the head snaps after impact.

Saad’s head wouldn’t go that way if he’d been hit on the chin.

Necks aren’t made of linguini.

If his head whiplashes into Brown is that classed as high contact?

 

[Tex9798]

It can take a second to wrap your head around, but the intentional is in relation to the actual bump.

He intended to collide with the other player.

The "intended" may not mean he intended to cause harm.

So, once we know he intended to bump the player, was it done with skill and care not to cause harm? Could he have avoided that harm?

Once you understand that then it makes more sense.

Technically all bumps are intentional... It's never graded that way though

 

[Dave]

I would say high impact, but careless rather than intentional. Other than being late it was the perfect bump. He came from in front of him, did not leave the ground, and clearly went shoulder to shoulder. Againt he was late, and should get a week given the injury, but that was a good strong bump and most coaches would want to see that from their players.

I’m not sure how anyone could argue that the bump wasn’t intentional. He clearly meant to bump him, and did so well after the ball had been disposed of.

 

[Doss]

If his head whiplashes into Brown is that classed as high contact?

Well, that is a very good question. I guess it is.

Is that a bit unlucky for the guy delivering the bump? Maybe. Maybe not.

I’m not sure how anyone could argue that the bump wasn’t intentional. He clearly meant to bump him, and did so well after the ball had been disposed of.

Yes, it was always going to be intentional. Not sure that can be argued against.

 

[Admiral Byng]

High Contact? I've looked a couple of times and can't really make it out. Am I just missing it?

My thoughts too... unless they are saying his head hit the shoulder after the initial bump with a whiplash sort of motion?

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

Since when has a bump been executed without wanting to cause some sort of harm? That's the one of the main reasons to lay a bump I would've thought.

Ideally you want to be causing harm by hitting the opposition players body though and not the head as that will get you suspended.

From what I've seen the initial contact from Brown was to Saad's shoulder, it was the whiplash motion that probably caused the concussion.

The main reason you'd bump somebody is to bump them off the ball or affect their disposal. Maybe you bump to cause injury in the reserves of the Woop Woop Football League, but generally speaking, being a ******* like that is frowned upon in the more serious competitions as intentionally causing injury is generally seen as not cool.

 

[didaksrightfoot]

It can take a second to wrap your head around, but the intentional is in relation to the actual bump.

He intended to collide with the other player.

The "intended" may not mean he intended to cause harm.

So, once we know he intended to bump the player, was it done with skill and care not to cause harm? Could he have avoided that harm?

Once you understand that then it makes more sense.

Technically all bumps are intentional... It's never graded that way though

I’m not sure how anyone could argue that the bump wasn’t intentional. He clearly meant to bump him, and did so well after the ball had been disposed of.

But that's like saying any action that occurs on the footy field is intentional.

I consider the "intentional" to be saved for action that are "not football actions" (eg. Punches).
Are sling tackles considered intentional? You clearly intend to tackle the guy, and any tackles intends to use force, right? I reckon every tackler also tries to hurt their opponent - its a huge part of AFL footy. From a quick google search, sling tackles (with head high contact) are considered rough conduct or careless, not intentional.

A bump is allowed in play. He was late, and that was the mistake he made.
The same way a guy sling tackling makes the mistake of carrying the tackle through.

Brown did not make head high contact. He did not leave the ground. He did not come from behind. Other than being a bit late it was the perfect bump.
The only reason there is a case to answer is that Brown is a much bigger and Saad either didnt see, didnt expect, or didnt prepare for contact.